About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80 (some duplicates have been removed)
. that authorized you to fund the port property and it expanded the range of eligible use of tax increments with respect to the america's cup 80 to ask the state if it would allow infrastructure districts to capture the state that quarter of property tax dollars that goes up to the state and 801199 the state approved our ability to capture that tax increment under certain circumstances. >> i want to provide a little bit of the background between the ports fund. the bureau ton act which transfers from state to city control requires that we maintain a separate harbor fund it's separate from the city's general fund. we've done analysis over time to look at property taxes and the cost of city services on port property. there's a bit of a gap. there's some sources that are urban leashed and don't generate tax precedes. and there's a cost of providing city services in that budget. and we try and track that over time. there's a general prim the harbors shouldn't subsidize or excuse me. the general fund shouldn't subsidize those services. the improvements to piers and seismic upgrades there in t
growth for periods up to 45 years. and the difference compared to redevelopment is property taxes are divided into a number of recipients the state gets a property tax dollar and the remaining $0.10 is divided up between the school district and community college district. and under an infrastructure financing district typically the only increment that can be captured is the $0.65. you can't capture the money it goes to schools or to the community college district. so it's property taxes can be used to a finance infrastructure through bonds or on a pay as you go basis. the ports are structured a little bit differently. redevelopment focused on providing affordable housing. by state law 20 percent of the increment must be spent on parks, bay assess and the remove of bay fill. as you know there's significant historic contamination along the port property. so in 2005 is when we first went up to try to develop the tool and it was really based on the work that the director and cf o director did in the first 10 year capital plan. the plan says the structural financial plan is not in its
's general fund as to determine the i f p and also specify that the tax rate is established annually by the board of supervisors for the city and that's pursuant to the california revenue taxation code. and specify the tax increment may not be allocated to the cities general fund and to protect against sea level rise and finally, we consider the approval of this to be a policy decision. we'll be happy to respond to any questions and any questions? >> thank you very much for the recommendations. i think the changing the criteria 5 to look at the net fiscal general cities fund i'm wondering on behavior of the controllers office can comment not so much on all but in general what comments do you have about i f ds in the general fund if we move forward in the future? >> mr. chairman monique i'm from the controllers office. this is diverted for the benefits of the area and it really would depends on the developments of the property. we can do another analysis and this has been used in san francisco. in order to red blithe and improve the economical condition of that area but it does have
money? the biggest resource for san francisco and property taxes, it's over $1 billion a year. and we receive significant revenues from the business taxes and sales tax and hotel tax as well as other local sources. also important to know that about one out of every five dollars that san francisco spends comes from the state and federal government. when the federal government does things like implement a federal sequester. that has an impact here on san franciscans. if the state budget changes, that has an effect here on us. it's important to know that we have control over some of our revenue but not all of them. the mayor shared with you our five-year budget outlook. and mentioned the first two years. this is the fourth chart over with the red and black. the red bars show you how much our expenditures are projected to grow in the next five years and the black bars. we project over the five years we will have 13% more revenue, it's a strong economy. and at the same time our expenditures are expected to grow by 25%. so the gap between the growth in expenditures and revenue is what creat
cover that. first the changes to the matrix on page 4 we've added ab 41 from san mateo, a new taxing authority to fund opportunities, authorizes sales tax to be voted upon within that mpo region. we are recommending a watch and we'll know better how it looks like it's going to go. this bill has bounced from natural resources to rules committee to local government. so it's been a bouncing bauchl -- ball. it's on a matrix and we'll be watching it and if it comes back stronger at a later day. we recommending deletion ab 680 had been a spot measure and amended recently to apply a state route which has no applicability to san francisco bay area for your policy so we are recommending taking it off the matrix. a recent amended measure is being recommend today add ab 738 on page 7 of the matrix. it tends to provide a liability shield for employees of agencies that are developing bike plans. it sounds like a much needed simplification. we need to take a look at the bill at more depth to see how it fares in its first committee and finally as a watch position we are recommending the addition o
70 percent of san franciscans. i'm talking to you as a instructor. i want you to use the parcel taxes to be used for that purpose. it says that the taxes will prevent layoffs and to provide affordable qualify education for citizens. this is what i'm asking you to do and your resolution is going to help do that. now i committed might have to pay $632 for the next 8 years to maintain the quality of the education and i'm asking you to help us see that those funds are being used for what's intend. as a teacher for over 26 years i've never seen this. for faculties and students are being ignored. i feel fine we're not just the ones who are being ignored. now i want to continue to help my students. i'm tooech too non-credit classes this semester and students are being negatively impacted >> so, please wrap up. >> i'm asking you in our resolution i said that the city college of san francisco is crucial to the committee and social development of san francisco. i'm urging you to affirm that by moving the resolution forward >> i'm a native of san francisco. i got involved with this movement b
paying taxes which are the law by the irs making transactions of a thousand dollars or more remember this applies to taxi drivers or anybody. i could give you some more if you are interested >> thank you. next speaker, please and a (calling names). >> herbert senior citizen at risk. i noticed the last meeting the conduct of the participants were incriminated upon. the question i would like to propose if a bicyclists had their my case lanes removed on the street there would be such outrage you would have to call in the tax squad. the thing about this the parking spaces are being defended by those people and its endsable. the fact is people only shop once a week in contrast to people they could be making a thousand dollars in a purpose and those parking spaces are always in demand and so to remove them is really very destructive. i feel the bicyclists feeling is today hope street tomorrow the world. it will not hamper bicycling at all also in respect to the accident bicyclists have been struck how many of them went against the red light. we have to statistics about that. and one thi
modifications to their units so that they can live independently to layering subsidies on tax credit buildings, so the lovely new accessible housing that is developed is actually affordable to folks at the lowest income levels so just like we target homeless folks and layer subsidies in order to address the priority we could layer subsidies on tax credit buildings and get some of that accessible housing which is not affordable to our folks. maybe we can by layering some city subsidies on. there are other ideas that we've had like having a centralized data base around the affordable housing opportunities so people didn't need to run to a multd tude of housing providers and figure out the wait list for the building. there is no centralized data base. there are a ton of other ideas and i just want to reference some of the planning documents that maybe good reading for you. there is everything from the consolidated plan -- >> oh came back on. sorry for some reason it went off but it's back. >> there is the consolidated plan that the city is required to be eligible for hud funding. this is the
and county for the cost of those elections so the school is charged if there's a partial tax and those are based on the actual costs of the inclusion of the items in the ballot and the voting cards address so forth. for fiscal 11, 12 they charged $284,000 this was for the candidate. this was charging for the discounted rate and that number it one through 7. and the public i tilts commission also charges the community college 2 hundred and 407 thousand for the lease of the southeast community facility and however the city pays rent to the excellently for that the college pace 2 hundred and 7 thousand and the puc subsidies the power so the total cost to the excellently in the departments proximate $2.26 million in this past fiscal year on the second page. there's some detail on the elections in prior years it ranges between $20,300,000 depending upon the items on the voter pamphlet and the last item identifies money that the human agencies gives to the college and that amounts to about $2.8 million. so again, it's charges for services they're not in kind their actual services that are pr
on the first read. item 18. >> item 18 is a resolution approving the issuance of tax exempt obligation by the california enterprise development authority in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed 9 million to finance and refinance various capital facilities owned by the progress foundation. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. [gavel] >> item 19. >> item 19 is an ordinance [speaker not understood] general fund reserve of approximately 4.3 million to support shortfalls in the sheriff's department for fiscal year 2012 through 13. >> supervisor farrell. >> thank you, president chiu. colleagues, this is a supplemental that came before our budget and finance committee last week from our sheriff's department. it's the third supplemental we've seen this budget season. the first of the public defenders which is going to be coming back for another hearing soon and second obviously the department of public health supplemental. the reason for the supplemental were twofold. one, unknown workers' compensation costs due to a few big claims that were not predicted last year as we
the emergency medical transport tax or reimbursement. for expenditure reductions, we are reducing our materials and supplies budget in attempt to meet the target. additional attrition saving from the lower staffing levels seen currently also account for sometimev savings and we are continuing to work with the mayor's office for the 14-15 target reduction. as there are a number of adjustments including what i talked about, the [speaker not understood] coming online in mission bay that the department is requesting in its budget. wanted to just highlight some capital and bond projects that we're currently working on. as you know, the [speaker not understood] earthquake safety emergency response bond, we're working closely hand in hand with department of public works. ~ to carry out the administration of projects we're working on. that bond was passed in june of 2010. and it funds the new public safety building in mission beah long with some upgrades to the auxiliary water supply system, which is now under the jurisdiction of puc. we have transferred that over to budget cycles ago, as well as impro
for having this hearing today. i'm going to focus on prop k in particular which is the half cent sales tax for transportation in san francisco. however, there are a lot of funding programs that are available to address pedestrian safety, and the challenge is how to balance the various opportunities to address it in a strategic manner. is there enough funding? no. but i think we have an opportunity with the strategy to figure out the ways to address the highest need areas in a strategic way. in the past there hasn't been a clear vision how to put together the program of projects so what we're looking for with the five year prioritization programs is moving in the right direction to link transportation investments and the efforts of the pedestrian safety task force with safety goals and prop k is flexible in that regard. it can fund basically all of the transportation infrastructure improvements that you heard discussed today. tomorrow you have continental walks and safe to routes program and next month curb signals and curb ramps. we leverage federal and state grants for all of these p
it onto the ballot and have it pass overwhelmingly. prop e, business tax reform, one of those eternal debates at city hall about how do we actually move forward forming our business tax. we were able to put that 09ctionv ballot and it passed overwhelmingly. the debate on tics has been going on for a long time and it's one of those eternal debates at city hall. and i am pleased that we potentially have a resolution that will balance the needs of our many citizens this this -- or many residents, i should say, of this city, whether renters or tic owners, being able to find that common ground. ~ in this i will note to those who have been critical of the legislation that supervisor farrell and i introduced, i'll be honest, i didn't see very much dialogue about how to move forward to resolution before the legislation was actually pending. sides were extremely polarized and there was no -- i don't think that there was any meaningful discussion of how do we come up with some sort of legislation that everyone can live with and move forward. we now potentially have that. and sometimes even thou
of the tax exempt obligations by the kaeft enterprise development authority in an aggregate principal amount not-to-exceed $9 million finance and refinance various capital facilities owned by the progress foundation. >> we will hear from the controller's office of public demands. >> good morning, members of the budget and finance committee my name is (inaudible) and this approves the tax exempt of interest and it is a refunding of prior obligations for savings. and the resolution acknowledges that the public hearing was held by our office and should we have any questions on the project itself there are representative to answer the questions. there is no fiscal payment for the city and the city is not responsible for the repayment on those. >> thank you for the clarifications. any questions? >> we will open it up to public comment? does anybody want to comment on item three? step up. okay. public comment is closed. we move to item three forward with recommendation and we can do so without objection. >> could you call item four? >> resolution urging the retirement board of the employee retirem
for public land. san franciscans for fair taxes and better city services. yes on e, coalition of [speaker not understood] labor unions and tech companies. keep san francisco green. no on prop a, coalition of ecology, labor, business and environmentalists, major funding by [speaker not understood]. [speaker not understood]. rodrigo santos [speaker not understood] 2012. reelect supervisor david chiu 2012. protect our benefits, teachers, nurses, neighbors supporting eric mar for 2012 sponsored by san francisco labor council, san francisco labor council, labor and neighbors independent expenditure political action committee, building owners and managers association of san francisco political action committee, expenditures a.k.a. boma s.f. p-a-c ie. san francisco for women accountability supervisor opposing christina olague 2012. coalition for a safer california. committee on jobs, government reform fund. san francisco democratic county central committee. mayor ed lee for san francisco committee. coalition for sensible government major funding by san francisco association of realtors. san fran
and affordable housing by the value of private investment and using the power of tax increment financing. the value of the public land and the targeted developer fees and helping us create this vision without resorting to overburdening our general fund or new taxes. when this terminal was originally built in the 1930s it was a growing project. i'm confident the growth san francisco will continue to grow with a new transit center and downtown district. i also want to give a great shot out to president obama, it was really his funds that helped us kick this off and pelosi and feinstein and boxer and their on going constant up to date support. at the state level, governor brown has been a very strong supporter and leaders of both houses, president stein house and president per ez have shown strong leadership. this check is much more symbolic of many many other checks that have come as a result of investor confidence in the city. i want to thank the labor for being part of all these projects and the business community for working closely with us and the transbay joint powers authority for
will be increasing and decreasing on a budget. the first item is our prop k sales tax revenue. this amount was budgeted at 77.5 million, but as of january 14, we collected $2 million in sales tax revenue. we recommend we increase it by $7 million. then we have the corridor investment study. since the last budget we were able to obtain $81,000 and san francisco state university and general properties of the galleria. we anticipate spending about $63661 for the grant activity. in august of 2012 we were able to obtain a grant for $1.5 million. we will increase federal revenues and decrease other revenues by $251, 892 dollars. next we have the project, we are experiencing a total amount of $91,000 for next year. during the year we were able to obtain $434, 531. the treasure island mobility mansion, the item you just heard before, this item, we received a $500,000 federal grant from mtc. we will be spending approximately $64, 101 this year. this is the largest budget announcement. we are recognized $34.1 million revenues we'll be receiving from mtc. what happened is we anticipated this in the l
to the board of supervisors on board of supervisors file no. 130244 [health, business and tax regulations code - regulate and establish annual fees - cottage food operations] ordinance amending the health code, by adding section 452.1, to establish a procedure for regulating cottage food operations; amending the business and tax regulations code, by adding section 249.1a, to establish annual fees for cottage food operations; and making environmental findings. explanatory documents: bos file no. 130244 >> we have a presentation by richard lee dept. of public health. >> welcome >> i am not sure if you want to go through the document presented to staff last week or summarize. >> chair adams: summarize. >> this legalizes home kitchens were people can actually make food in their homes and sell retail to the general public which is totally different than what we are used to in environmental health. we actually have a lot of concerns about this regulation throughout the state; concern about the fact that people could make stuff at home which we don't have any control in terms , of how they are inspe
't notify people. first of all businesses are paying taxes so why can't we get all businesses from the tax rolls; secondly there are lists available to every neighborhood in business so it baffles me as a person who teaches direct marketing to uc berkeley . but they can't figure this out or take any suggestions for that that is extremely frustrating and part of the other problem is that they are doing a lot of their work out of the city. so for example when they do notify ,they are doing this out of hayward, and you can imagine that they would certainly hear this from me and they do and they promised they wouldn't do it again but so far we haven't had any other notification. so with the retail that we do have in the northeast mission we wanted to survive along with our pdr zone and at our meeting in the northeast mission we had quite it group from polk street came to our meeting a few weeks ago . and i guess the thing that startled us all is that we all have the same problems we all have the same complaints. we all have the same issues with the mta. i want to thank you so much for , our he
enforcement. we'll be talking about that but you need those taxes the enforcements is a strategy to get to the process. the way i hope to approach this is to ask how many taxis and then a little bit of a side issue why is the sighed car not the solution. we ask ourselves that question, too, and we have an answer for you. then as the port structure there's a good solution we think are important and from there recommendations. as you know this is based 3 documents. i should review this is our general approach is to rely on multiple lines of studies. this is to get the local story and history it's difficult to get user voices so we use tourism hospitality and all the folks we talked to have their story. to reach out further we says drivers individualsly. in fact, a large sample was results by neighborhood. it was an informative reach. as economists we look at how it's structured. we look at other cities we have our model of taxi demand and we go out on the street so we did some extensive street observations. and you yourself have been looking at this for quite a while. we should start by d
are not final. they are due in april with property tax. so we haven't seen what that's going result in, but it typically we are on budget with that also. we'll know more next month. and just as a comparison between the previous fiscal year through march and this fiscal year it's 21.02 higher ant
the transient occupancy tax in which the city is a defendant pursuant to government code -- administrative code section 67.10 d1 which permits this post section. >> president chiu: at this time can we have a motion to go into closed section? is there any public comment on whether we should go into closed session? is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. with that, without objection that's going to closed section. if i could ask members of the public if you could please step out. and look forward to our city attorney and others stepping in. (board of supervisors in closed session)
project but we had reconstituted the project around the pillars that remain. so an ongoing tax revenues and the port seeking to do the appropriate upgrade to a be able to host the events. i think the port expanded the cycle of their activities. and that was evaluated through the improved use of the ports facilities. at that point there have been a number of agreements about how certain things were going to be paid for during the events and preparations for the events and then on the capital side for narrow improvements that weren't going to be paid for by the ports. those are around pier 29 facility. so together and this is going to be used fulfill looking it now we've seen approximately $3.3 million of costs that the general costs were going to pay from lost rents from lost tenants and other consulting costs. of that amount $300,000 has been paid to the port and has been compensated. so what's the next step? after the america's cup events in 2012 we learned what with your not only what with your doing with the fundraising but to bring people to san francisco. on the fundraising front t
afternoon commissioners tom exclusive demeanor of living city. i was on the sales tax committee and we put a lot of money towards budget transportation projects in san francisco. i see that i think incredible strongly that this plaza should be an open space. you've got a train running underneath us right now. we built the water front street car we're expanding ferry operations out here. it's a transit rich place probably in the entire continent. if there was an activation project we've been all for it it should be an open space. unfortunately we've got a parking proposal. every week day it will be parking for 12 hours so when it's not programmed the default is parking. let's take a space not dedicated to parking and turn it into a parking lot that will generate thousands and thousands of trips so people walking and cycling will having have all those cars and it will be less safe. it's not in keeping with any of your plans. i've included some policy plans there i was hoping the staff would have policy. it's a lost opportunity. it should really, really be a great open space. we've consistent
clients are working poor. they pay their taxes. they may run into a rough patch now and then and what we're able to provide is a bridge towards getting them back on their feet. the center averages about 14,000 visits a year in the health clinic alone. one of the areas that we specialize in is family medicine, but the additional focus of that is is to provide care to women and children. women find out they're pregnant, we talk to them about the importance of getting good prenatal care which takes many visits. we initially will see them for their full physical to determine their base line health, and then enroll them in prenatal care which occurs over the next 9 months. group prenatal care is designed to give women the opportunity to bond during their pregnancy with other women that have similar due dates. our doctors here are family doctors. they are able to help these women deliver their babies at the hospital, at general hospital. we also have the wic program, which is a program that provides food vouchers for our families after they have their children, up to age 5 they are able to rec
have the overhead i want to show you may have seen that but this is the last issue of the united tax news letter with the picture of the mayor on the cover. i think he needs to be called out on this. because the mayor of this city as turned his back on - the city's own taxi industry and this regulatory agency by endorsing the operations of companies that are operating in the city unlawfully, unregulated, unlicensed. and for the mayor to do that i mean it seems disgrace full to me. those companies are providing uncontrolled competition. their numbers are growing day by day and the direction that is solution is taking of putting out more taxis to meet more of their vehicles to take back taxi share from us. i don't think that's going to work. there's a very influential article that goes back a few decades called the tragedy of the common sense where, you know, the farmers use a common area to grace their cattle and, you know, farmers this farmer puts another cow an and another farmer puts a cow on it and pretty soon that's their individual benefit to do it but the cows are staffing. we
hundred and 28 million and knowing in the 2008 clean and safe neighborhoods tax bond for the safety improvements repairs and renovations arrest after the bond we are currently completing last year in 2012 the citizens propped prospective b for 1 hundred and 55 million for san francisco clean and safe neighborhoods parks renovations and improvements. the original capital program budget needs at the beginning of 1999, was 4 hundred million. however, there are - there were - this was determined that it was not sufficient to be able to innovate all the facilities and office space sea as we see the development in that area. the funds at this point are $185 million as of march 31, 2013. i will bring you a little bit of background on how those 4 hundred million are not enough to innovate the repairs. in 2007 we the an evaluation of the 2 hundred parks and recreation centers and there's is program called come at the time the technology that the includes all the sufficient needs that we have. so it was determined after the statement the capital needs were 1 i pledge allegiance to the flag 7
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)